Jump to content

Puppoochi

  • Posts

    845
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Puppoochi

  1. The way I see it, if a breeder adopts irresponsible breeding practices and breeds diseased animals when it could have been prevented, the breeder should then be accountable. But if all available tests for common diseases pertaining to the breed were done on the Dam and then put to what the breeder believes to be a suitable sire, then no, they should NOT be accountable.

  2. Or a Toy Poodle. Mine are all lazy couch potatoes most of the time, but they have plenty of energy when it comes to going for walks. If you keep a poodle very short, you can let a few months go by without a trim but you must cut the hair away from their eyes. Also if they are very short, they appear to be NON SHEDDING.

  3. I've had many buyer asking me how long do I guarantee my pups for? I say to them I can only guarantee for diseases where there are genetic tests and they are guaranteed for life.

    And yes, a slipping patella can be environmental rather than genetic.

    I am of the understanding that people avoid doing agility with their dogs until they reach a certain age as not to cause injury caused by excessive strain on the not fully developed body???

    Most manufacturers only give 12 months guarantee on electrical goods, we as consumers are given the choice of buying an extended warranty (which has served me nicely not so long ago). This warranty acts as a kind of insurance. The onus should be on the puppy buyer to get pet insurance I think.

    Many insurance policies do not cover certain breed related problems and usually they will have a list of things that they dont cover. Many have limits as to how much they will pay and if a procedure exceeds their ceiling then the owner has to pay the remainder often on top of the policy excess. This might help to reduce the costs for the owner but sometimes isnt the answer.

    Like all insurance companies they are in the business of making money and will always look carefully at whether they will pay out or not.

    The more that people begin to use pet insurance, the more the companies will have to pay out and so the higher the premiums will become and the harder they will look at claims. Eventually they will add more and more exclusions, just like with house insurance and flood/fire cover.

    It's a "Catch 22" situation.

    BUYER BEWARE!!!!!

    If someone for instance wanted a breed that was prone to certain genetic conditions, if the breeder takes all possible care when breeding, but a pup purchased still developed a genetic condition, shouldn't the responsibility lie on the buyer, knowing they are buying a breed that may suffer a lot of health problems??? Isn't the buyer taking a risk with wanting that breed?

  4. I've had many buyer asking me how long do I guarantee my pups for? I say to them I can only guarantee for diseases where there are genetic tests and they are guaranteed for life.

    And yes, a slipping patella can be environmental rather than genetic.

    I am of the understanding that people avoid doing agility with their dogs until they reach a certain age as not to cause injury caused by excessive strain on the not fully developed body???

    Most manufacturers only give 12 months guarantee on electrical goods, we as consumers are given the choice of buying an extended warranty (which has served me nicely not so long ago). This warranty acts as a kind of insurance. The onus should be on the puppy buyer to get pet insurance I think.

  5. I have 2, from the same litter

    SIRE: UK.CH.AUST.CH. MONTFLAIR'S TOY SOLDIER

    DAM: CH. WYTRAPSARDEE PRIMA DONNA

    DOB: 10/10/2012

    POODIFUL MASTER BLASTER (APOLLO)

    70762_1839.jpg

    POODIFUL STAIRWAY TO HEAVEN (JEZABEL)

    70760_158.jpg

    Apollo wins Baby in Group today at Tas Kennel Club. Judge Mrs A Bowe (NSW). I'm a very proud granny

    A bit slow off the mark but Apollo wins @ the Melbourne Royal 2013 Best of Breed, Best Puppy in Group, and was shortlisted for the group as well. I'm ever so proud of this little man.

    70762_971.jpg70762_1459.jpg70762_46.jpg

  6. I should add that I still voted 'yes' even though I don't agree with the poll as it stands, with a bit of wording correction it would have been better accepted, in saying that though 92% of people voting have said yes so far.

    I agree, I also think the poll should have been at the end of the article.

  7. I have 2, from the same litter

    SIRE: UK.CH.AUST.CH. MONTFLAIR'S TOY SOLDIER

    DAM: CH. WYTRAPSARDEE PRIMA DONNA

    DOB: 10/10/2012

    POODIFUL MASTER BLASTER (APOLLO)

    70762_1839.jpg

    POODIFUL STAIRWAY TO HEAVEN (JEZABEL)

    70760_158.jpg

    Apollo wins Baby in Group today at Tas Kennel Club. Judge Mrs A Bowe (NSW). I'm a very proud granny

  8. I can no longer access the fb PR page, OR the PR Beware page. I can understand MN blocking me BUT, I cannot understand me not having access to the PR Beware page???? Anyone else having issues????

    I couldn't get on the PRB page for about 5 mins but it seems to be working fine now.

    must have been some glitch, I can access both now too

  9. I was emailed this a short while ago, on the Pr's wall(apparently I can't stand looking at the site) after this letter is a photo of a dog being restrained and euthed.

    Follows below;

    Open letter to Blacktown City Council

    17/03/2013

    Dear Cr Len Robinson,

    ... In April 2011, Pound Rounds Inc began working with two pounds in Sydney, Blacktown Pound being one of them, to help them rehome the dogs on their kill lists. Both pounds had already agreed to work with rescue and had very limited restricted rehoming practices. Today is a sad day for all of us. For the reasons below, we are very sad to inform you that, save for the dogs we have already placed holds on, we have decided to suspend our efforts to assist Blacktown Pound in rehoming their kill listed pets effective immediately.

    This suspension will remain in place for as long as the pound remain committed to their new temperament testing procedure to decide which pets are killed, not which pets need urgent rehoming or remedial assistance. We have become aware that the new practice is not restricted to human aggression (which Pound Rounds have always supported as a not for release parameter) and goes further to include the presentation of dog reactivity as a reason to kill the dog, rather than release it for rehoming. In a pound environment this is wholly unjust.

    For almost two years, we have supported the staff at the pound and the Blacktown City Council in their successful and proactive efforts to help dogs let down by their owners, but no longer let down by their community. These efforts have seen Blacktown Council enjoy the full support of their community due to the record low levels of dog killing in their pound facility (practically "No Kill" levels). This record rehoming rate did not result in any spike in the incidence of dog attacks or anything of that kind in the area, the State of NSW or the country as a whole. In fact it was the most successful period of rehoming and community oriented support these pets have ever enjoyed. Pound Rounds and rescue in general accepted that some (very, very few) pets may have been damaged beyond what was possible to rehome. We trusted the pound's decisions because they were made with care, caution and included an understanding that, on the pound's advice to rescue, some dogs were not immediately rehomed, but kept in care for evaluation/treatment/testing/rehabilitation outside of the horrendously stressful pound environment.

    The introduction of a subjective, draconian and unwieldy instrument such as a so called "temperament test" to simply work out 'who to kill' is the end of the relationship of trust we have enjoyed with the pound for 2 years.

    In this case, following requests from rescue groups who were aware that the pound was full to capacity and therefore surprised that a kill list had not yet been disseminated, a kill list was subsequently provided to those rescue groups (including Pound Rounds) on the afternoon of Thursday 14th March. The list stipulated that the dogs were to be rehomed by Sunday 17th March at 11am (and additional to that deadline, there appeared a new 'disclaimer' regarding supposed "temperament testing"). Rescue groups went to work as usual. Homes were lined up and several different rescue groups and people from the community expressed interest in supporting their chosen dogs; warts and all. The next day, Friday 15th March, the pound's rehoming officer invited independent temperament assessors from the NSW Animal Welfare League (AWL) to assess the dogs on the list for rehoming. 5 of the 7 remaining dogs on the list were then killed without warning to the rescue groups.

    Most dogs on the list had been held, cuddled, photographed, videoed and walked by several different staff & pound volunteers. The AWL formally used these same temperament tests over 5 years ago to excuse a kill rate of well over 50% (2008/2009- greater than their rehoming rate). The RSPCA still uses these tests, quite infamously, to try and explain away a kill rate of over 50% of unreclaimed pet dogs. Campbelltown Pound still kills 64% of their pets. The Lost Dogs Home's temperament tests are used to excuse killing more than 10,000 pets every - single - year.

    These "temperament tests" are widely acknowledged by many as unscientific and out-dated. Under new leadership, not even the AWL uses these tests to simply kill dogs without efforts to rehabilitate or rehome them appropriately (warts and all). Blacktown Pound was, until 48 hours ago, a shining example to other facilities on how to partner with their community to help rehome the forgotten pets in their care. What gave rise to the sudden killing? Was there a sudden and startling increase in the number of independently verified reports of rehomed dogs presenting a greater risk to the community than any other dog? No. There is no probative evidence that makes these pets any less of a community pet just because they are impounded behind a council's brick wall.

    We have discussed the recent events amongst ourselves at length. Pound Rounds' mission statement mandates using all measures possible to save life. Unlike policies which utilise proactive measures such as rehabilitation or remedial support, our mission statement is not compatible with policies which allow and see temperament testing resulting in the unnecessary deaths of up to 70% of kill listed dogs tested. This is not least because of the possible (but highly likely) breed discrimination such policies may result in by default. Most kill listed dogs are bull breeds. Furthermore, in practical terms for rescues such as ourselves, such policies also hinder any ability to fundraise for the kill listed dogs, lest they be killed without notice.

    Moreover, and let me be personal for a minute - could any human being turn up week after week, year after year, to hold a special brindle dog, cuddle him, photograph him, promise him your help, try with all your heart to help save him, only to have that very boy killed sporadically by some arbitrary ruling? No? Nor can we. Nor, we suggest, can many volunteers who forge similar bonds with these breathing, living beings. The introduction of temperament testing leaves rescue groups, the pound's own volunteers, and the community that watch and support rescue's efforts, heartbroken and frustrated. If council can use the "temperament assessment" technique to mandate a pet's certain death for behaviours as growling at another dog in the pound, we simply cannot.

    What protective measures are in place to prevent the killing by law? Subject to exceptions in place for classified "dangerous" or "restricted" breeds, no matter how an animal (or dog in this case) ends up in a council pound, subsections 64(5) and 64A(2) of the Companion Animals Act 1998 (NSW) stipulate that it is the DUTY of the council concerned to consider whether there is an ALTERNATIVE action to that of destroying the animal and if practicable to adopt any such alternative. It is NSW state law to choose rehoming of these dogs.

    The incredibly difficult decision on our part to withdraw our support is not an indictment on the staff at the pound. We acknowledge that we have worked effectively with them for two years to rehome impounded community pets. We also hope this policy is repealed as soon as possible and temperament tests become a tool to help poundies receive the appropriate care, remedial work and homes they need to remain safe and cared for. The pound is full and the only victims will be the poor dogs still left in the facility whose fate is now left to chance or worse - judgement.

    However, we simply cannot fly in the face of our own doctrine and stand by and accept a policy which is so poorly implemented that 5 in 7 dogs were killed within hours of its introduction.

    It is not easy to turn away from the forgotten beings we have tirelessly sought to promote, save and rehome. The prospect leaves us truly shaken - but - and after much deliberation - we cannot stay silent on this issue and allow indiscriminate killing to occur while we stand by and simply watch. It is beyond what we can take as human beings. History is a great teacher.

    "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing": Edmund Burke, political philosopher (1729 - 1797).

    Yours in tragedy.

    All at Pound Rounds

    For Marlon, Zorro, Clint, Ronan and Dignity. In loving memory.See More

    .

    blah blah blah blah blah.

    It's probably because of Pound Rounds this has come about. Mel Norman is powerless to do anything, she's not in control, so she spat the dummy and said I'm not playing anymore.

    Shows you how much she cares about the dogs that are left there. It's all a little power trip to her. A way for her to gain notoriety I think.

  10. Given the fact that PR irresponsibly rehomed a DA dog into an inappropriate home and a little fluffy was killed, would that not be reason enough for the shelters NOT to release dogs to PR? If threatened by MN, they would have legit reason NOT to release dogs to PR for the safety of the community? I personally think the shelter would be somewhat accountable if say a child was killed by a PR dog?

  11. I wish some judges would know the breed standard. My BIS show winning bitch, who was also No 1 Toy Poodle All Breeds 2012, was non awarded for having inverted lower K9s. And then I heard the judge boasted about non awarding my bitch. READ THE BREED STANDARD, before non awarding a dog. Some judges are to say the least not worth showing under.

  12. Funds can be used however the group likes - it can be hoarded till their heart's content. So long as it's used for the dogs and not personal gain (unless they pay wages) then it's all good.

    The trouble they will have is that they are fundraising for specific (and sometimes invisible) dogs. When fundraising for something specific, people are giving money for that specific thing. If the money is not being used for that dog, and being used for other things, then this could be counted as misleading and deceptive.

    To fundraise for a rescue facility, they should only be allocating funds that have either come in as generic donations or donations specifically for that cause.

    11 Fundraising through direct marketing

    If a fundraising appeal involves solicitation by way of direct marketing (including by telephone,

    electronic device such as a facsimile machine, the website or direct mailing), the authorised

    fundraiser must ensure that:

    (a) the content of all direct marketing communications is not misleading or deceptive or

    likely to mislead or deceive

    14 Advertisements, notices and information

    (1) Any advertisement, notice or information provided as part of a fundraising appeal must:

    (a) clearly and prominently disclose the name of the authorised fundraiser, and

    (b) not be reasonably likely to cause offence to a person, and

    © be based on fact and must not be false or misleading.

    (2) A person conducting or participating in a fundraising appeal must use his or her best

    endeavours, at all times, to answer honestly any question directed to the person in relation

    to the purpose of the appeal or the details of the appeal, or to arrange to find answers to

    questions that he or she is unable to answer. In particular, if it is requested, information is to be given as to how the gross income and any articles obtained from the appeal will be

    distributed and on the other matters referred to in sub-paragraphs (3)(a) and (4).

    Link: Authority Conditions.

    this looks kind of generic to me

    https://www.facebook.com/PoundRoundsAustralia/app_168151469879028

  13. If I miss anything let me know, I'm starting with requesting the accounts and will give them the allowed time limit and then go from there. Heather is back BTW :laugh:

    After Heathers psychotic break I can't see some posts, is it just me or have they stopped people writing on their wall?

    yep, they stopped it after I asked about a little dog that got killed by a PR rescue.

    they responded by saying that person that adopted was told the dog had issues but wanted it anyway and they left it outside alone with the little dog.

    I asked, Is that not irresponsible placement?

    then ALL the posts by others disappeared

  14. I refuse to interact with MN - the woman has some serious issues.

    Not to mention her verbal diarrhea, spewed at anyone that dares disagree or question with her.

    and not to mention the insulting manner in which she does it

    Last night I had a few too many and couldn't help but write this........

    another OFF comment courtesy of Mel. A human repellent, that's what you are. You display a total lack of respect to anyone with your denigrating retorts. And I do believe you have a superiority complex. I have absolutely no idea what gripe you have with DOL, but I'm sure if you got kicked off of the forum, it's because you are vile and obnoxious and have no sense of how to communicate without being abrasive and repugnant. Your higher education obviously did not teach you about diplomacy. You are judgmental and you view things in black and white only. I think if I ever met you, I couldn't hold back and vomit in your face.

×
×
  • Create New...